On another note, does this apply to fixed speed cameras aswell? or is it only in the cases with equipment being manually handled by officers?

9.7, just under the table at 9.6 suggests that it does not remove a police officers discretion, mentioning that they can prosecute for lower than the guidelines but need to consider the equipment tolerences (2mph under 60mph, 3% over 60mph). ACPO guidelines are just that, guidelines, at the end of the day it depends whether or not the copper is having a bad day

Officer discretion means they can use their judgement and not give you a ticket for doing 85-90mph in a 70. Not go outside the guidelines and attempt to prosecute an un enforceable offence, ie 72 in a 70.

ACPO guidlines are just that guidelines.  As your speedo can be reading fast by 10% by law how can a court find you guilty when you had no way of knowing that you were over by under 10%?  Any solicitor worth their salt would be able to defend that without problem.  I know people on here have stated that they have been prosecuted for being within the 10% and if they say so then so be it as I have no nowledge of their particuliar case.  In my past experience I have never known this and it usally has been a story from a bloke in a pub. 

 

I would suggest that if anyone is issued with a FPT for less than 10% they seriously consider going to court to fight their case.  That would of course involve cost and time that often isn't thought to be worthwhile.

 

Very often these days there are speed warning devices at the side of the road that give out the speed you are doing.  How accurate are they?  Who knows but what would be the point in telling you that you were doing 28 in a 30 if you were  doing more?  Many peolpe if shown to be doing 28 past these will naturally up their speed next time until it reads 30 on the unit (possibly 32 on the speedo).  So if the unit was wrong that could lead them to be prosecuted if no discretion were used.

 

I doubt many people have been genuinely prosecuted for exceeding the limit by less than 10% and if they had then there is a statutory defence with the Con and Use Regs.  Of course my post is only my opinion and anyone who falls foul of any of this should seek advice from someone who is up to date with current legislation.  (I am not)

 

Regards Chris

Officer discretion means they can use their judgement and not give you a ticket for doing 85-90mph in a 70. Not go outside the guidelines and attempt to prosecute an un enforceable offence, ie 72 in a 70.

 

From my understanding of this, as long as it's within the equipments tolerences it is enforceable as it states clearly that a summons or FPN can be issued although the speed recorded may be lower than guideline figures i.e 34mph in a 30, as the equipment tolerence is accounted for up to 32mph. It also states that it is possible to use device tolerences as a prosecution threshold.

 

Your correct in saying it's not possible to prosecute for 72 in 70, but it is enforceable for 74/75 whereas the table says it should only occur above 79mph

You may be lucky and get the course as said, I think they're trying to push this more as I think they're starting to realise that education and awareness and a big guilt trip carries more significance than just chucking a few points around. more like it's sudden realisation that if they can avoid points, then there's more mugs to have on second time round. ,then courses come easier .After all they don't really want to kill off the golden geese early ,do they.  And if points+fine, then local lot get nothing, as this goes to HMG.

 

My sarcastic take on UK wonderful way of  effectuating road safety.

 

.I notice others have also shown some of the other ways our SCP experts can "adjust the figures"to keep the income rolling in.

My sarcastic take on UK wonderful way of  effectuating road safety.

 

.I notice others have also shown some of the other ways our SCP experts can "adjust the figures"to keep the income rolling in.

Oooo you are cynical, but you make a good point lol

In response to Chris,

The reason that speedos are faster than actual speed to to cover automotive companies from being blamed for the cause of speeding, i.e. covering their own backs, if you speedo says your doing 36, your actual speed is 33, surely that still suggests that your speeding knowingly? i.e. when I go past speed cameras I tend to follow the reading on my speedo rather than the actual speed, even though I know my speedo is out, just to be safe.

ACPO guidlines are just that guidelines.  As your speedo can be reading fast by 10% by law how can a court find you guilty when you had no way of knowing that you were over by under 10%?  Any solicitor worth their salt would be able to defend that without problem.  I know people on here have stated that they have been prosecuted for being within the 10% and if they say so then so be it as I have no nowledge of their particuliar case.  In my past experience I have never known this and it usally has been a story from a bloke in a pub. 

 

I would suggest that if anyone is issued with a FPT for less than 10% they seriously consider going to court to fight their case.  That would of course involve cost and time that often isn't thought to be worthwhile.

 

Very often these days there are speed warning devices at the side of the road that give out the speed you are doing.  How accurate are they?  Who knows but what would be the point in telling you that you were doing 28 in a 30 if you were  doing more?  Many peolpe if shown to be doing 28 past these will naturally up their speed next time until it reads 30 on the unit (possibly 32 on the speedo).  So if the unit was wrong that could lead them to be prosecuted if no discretion were used.

 

I doubt many people have been genuinely prosecuted for exceeding the limit by less than 10% and if they had then there is a statutory defence with the Con and Use Regs.  Of course my post is only my opinion and anyone who falls foul of any of this should seek advice from someone who is up to date with current legislation.  (I am not)

 

Regards Chris

Totally agree. If I was prosecuted within %10 I'd definitely appeal, I'd also try and claim the +2 if circumstances allowed such. Those flashing warnings at roadside are not only distracting but highlight how inaccurate speedos are. Funnily enough the ones that tell you your speed are always usually %10 compared to what my speedo is reading. If you use sat nav with your speed displayed even though it's a tad more delayed it tends to be more accurate in relation to those roadside jobbies.

A case in the local area last year (I think) where many people had been prosecuted under a zero tolerance to speeding approach by the local force. It made it's way to the local radio station after many complaints about 32mph in a 30mph limit etc. and they invited the chief constable on to the radio show to talk about it. He surprisingly agreed, and while there admitted that he'd made an error of judgement and his statement of "zero tolerance" was meant to be taken as "all speeding to be reported for summons or speed awareness course within the ACPO guidelines rather than officers allowing discretion", but certain officers had taken it to mean 30mph was the limit and over that was a speeding offence. He stated on the air that anyone who'd received a prosecution for 34mph or less should contact him directly and it would be rescinded.

In response to Chris,

The reason that speedos are faster than actual speed to to cover automotive companies from being blamed for the cause of speeding, i.e. covering their own backs, if you speedo says your doing 36, your actual speed is 33, surely that still suggests that your speeding knowingly? i.e. when I go past speed cameras I tend to follow the reading on my speedo rather than the actual speed, even though I know my speedo is out, just to be safe.

Knowingly speeding? Kind of, depends on the motivation and circumstances I guess. At the end of the day no ones speedos are %100 accurate and neither is the majority of people's driving, I doubt the majority of people go over a speed limit change at exactly the speed of the new zone. Not saying they're being reckless and may be careful drivers, but to say there can never be any margin for discretion is a tad draconian. As outlined by rustynuts above. Sure, we know our speedos are out by roughly %10 but won't know exactly how much out until a ticket comes through the door. Of course it's better to be safe than sorry but nobody is perfect. Even examiners will tolerate the %10 as long as they're sure excessive speed and awareness isn't a consistent problem. Will probably pick up minors for it, but again nobody's perfect.

Just playing devil's advocate for a moment

Your speedo MIGHT be 10% out, it equally might not

Why work on the basis that it automatically is and drive at an indicated 66 in a 60

Work on the basis it is accurate and there's no problem

Knowledge has little to do with it, and if a properly calibrated HO certified device clocks you at a speed you've got a hell of a game on to get out of it

Knowingly speeding? Kind of, depends on the motivation and circumstances I guess. At the end of the day no ones speedos are %100 accurate and neither is the majority of people's driving, I doubt the majority of people go over a speed limit change at exactly the speed of the new zone. Not saying they're being reckless and may be careful drivers, but to say there can never be any margin for discretion is a tad draconian. As outlined by rustynuts above. Sure, we know our speedos are out by roughly %10 but won't know exactly how much out until a ticket comes through the door. Of course it's better to be safe than sorry but nobody is perfect. Even examiners will tolerate the %10 as long as they're sure excessive speed and awareness isn't a consistent problem. Will probably pick up minors for it, but again nobody's perfect.

 

My point is just that the discretion works both ways, they can let you off when your meant to be getting a FPN but they can take also it to the CPS if under the normal guideline prosecution speed as long as their measure equipment tolerences are taken into consideration. Whether or not CPS dismisses it is their choice, i.e. if its a 30, they're following you in an unmarked car, you maintain a speed of 33mph (real speed) for 5 mins, in a busy area with many hazards, it may give the officer reason to say the extra 3mph was unsafe. At the end of the day 3mph makes a difference in stopping distance, however small, it may enough to breach the gap between life and death if you hit someone, which is ofcourse, the whole point of speed limits.

My point is just that the discretion works both ways, they can let you off when your meant to be getting a FPN but they can take also it to the CPS if under the normal guideline prosecution speed as long as their measure equipment tolerences are taken into consideration. Whether or not CPS dismisses it is their choice, i.e. if its a 30, they're following you in an unmarked car, you maintain a speed of 33mph (real speed) for 5 mins, in a busy area with many hazards, it may give the officer reason to say the extra 3mph was unsafe. At the end of the day 3mph makes a difference in stopping distance, however small, it may enough to breach the gap between life and death if you hit someone, which is ofcourse, the whole point of speed limits.

So again it comes back round to circumstances and consistency, something a speed camera doesn't take into consideration whether it's fixed or mobile. Of course I'm aware of what the point is in speed limits and anybody who drives at excessive speed for the circumstances and conditions should be punished. But quite often it's debatable whether the %10 is too excessive. Of course an officer would be well within his rights to have a word or issue a penalty in such a situation and you may feel agrieved to be caught like that. But it doesn't change the fact that allowances, inaccuracies, discrepancies and circumstances are always going to be a part of it. Speeding is almost a black and white situation but by no means all the time, unfortunately there is no simple answer. Suffice it to say that I think a lot of people here drive consistently and appropriately with high levels of awareness and dont habitually and excessively speed, and if you ask me in terms of general road users that's about as good as it gets.

My point is just that the discretion works both ways, they can let you off when your meant to be getting a FPN but they can take also it to the CPS if under the normal guideline prosecution speed as long as their measure equipment tolerences are taken into consideration. Whether or not CPS dismisses it is their choice, i.e. if its a 30, they're following you in an unmarked car, you maintain a speed of 33mph (real speed) for 5 mins, in a busy area with many hazards, it may give the officer reason to say the extra 3mph was unsafe. At the end of the day 3mph makes a difference in stopping distance, however small, it may enough to breach the gap between life and death if you hit someone, which is ofcourse, the whole point of speed limits.

I think you mis understand the whole prosecution/fine system, it has nothing to do with CPS. If an officer issues a ticket/road side reports you for summons it doesn't go to cps advice, it is prosecuted regardless however the traffic inspector/ticket office reviewing officer may have something to say about the TOR if it for 32mph in a 30. You'll find all officers are told to ad hear to capo policy in England and wales.

Can I ask where you get your knowledge from sathit?

I think you mis understand the whole prosecution/fine system, it has nothing to do with CPS. If an officer issues a ticket/road side reports you for summons it doesn't go to cps advice, it is prosecuted regardless however the traffic inspector/ticket office reviewing officer may have something to say about the TOR if it for 32mph in a 30. You'll find all officers are told to ad hear to capo policy in England and wales.

Can I ask where you get your knowledge from sathit?

Experience, I was reported for two offences by an unmarked car, of which only one the CPS decided to try and prosecute me for

I thought speedometers were only allowed to over read, never under, so based on that if someone receives a NIP the speedo would have been showing at least 10% + 2 over the limit assuming the acpo guidelines were being used and quite likely more so what's the issue, either they were knowingly speeding or they were not paying attention so deserve the letter IMO.

I thought speedometers were only allowed to over read, never under, so based on that if someone receives a NIP the speedo would have been showing at least 10% + 2 over the limit assuming the acpo guidelines were being used and quite likely more so what's the issue, either they were knowingly speeding or they were not paying attention so deserve the letter IMO.

Is 79 not safe on an empty motorway then?

Is 79 not safe on an empty motorway then?

 

What speed isn't safe on an empty motorway? (if the car can handle it)

To be fair I think the OP has had his question answered now.  We can discuss the merits good or bad of speed enforcement until we are blue in the face but I doubt any of us are angels.  I just sold a Volvo V50 diesel because I wanted something a bit more fun to play with.  Having said that 'if' I choose to speed it will be where I consider it to be safe and if I get caught then big boys rules.  I know the rules so play the game accordingly.  There are some that just will not admit they are wrong or it is always someone elses fault (not the OP I hasten to add) so if they get caught it was maybe because the Police officer ws having a bad day!

 

Speed enforcement in theory is a good thing but it is used as revenue collection quite often with little to do (if nothing) with raod safety.  That is my opinion based on what I have seen but I don't expect everyone to agree.

 

Regards Chris

What speed isn't safe on an empty motorway? (if the car can handle it)

Kind of exactly my point, that speeding isn't completely a black and white situation and shouldn't always be judged as so when within the speed +10% +2 (where applicable). Oh and it's not necessarily a question of whether the car can handle it, last time I checked they were controlled by people who should drive to the conditions and be aware of the limitations of the car in the first instance.

Experience, I was reported for two offences by an unmarked car, of which only one the CPS decided to try and prosecute me for

Ah, well take it from a serving police officer with 9 years service, I've never met an officer that would report for speeding less than acpo policy as the force wouldnt support it. Also if you get road side reported but recieve nothing further, it's isnt the cps that's let you off, it's the officer.

Ah, well take it from a serving police officer with 9 years service, I've never met an officer that would report for speeding less than acpo policy as the force wouldnt support it. Also if you get road side reported but recieve nothing further, it's isnt the cps that's let you off, it's the officer.

I received a summons for both offences and one which got dropped when i appeared in court

Is 79 not safe on an empty motorway then?

I would agree that it is safe, but as we all know that's not how the man in the van with the camera works. We all do it, even me...gulp, but if we get caught then there's no point moaning about it, which to be fair to the OP he hasn't.

I would agree that it is safe, but as we all know that's not how the man in the van with the camera works. We all do it, even me...gulp, but if we get caught then there's no point moaning about it, which to be fair to the OP he hasn't.

Quite right, but if I was caught doing 79 on a motorway by a camera at 4am I would appeal, however I do doubt the ticket would come through. The point I was making was really about situations not always being black and white, so to say that people doing 10% over are knowingly speeding and should be punished doesn't really stand in all circumstances and conditions, hence the need for a margin and element of discretion.

Quite right, but if I was caught doing 79 on a motorway by a camera at 4am I would appeal, however I do doubt the ticket would come through. The point I was making was really about situations not always being black and white, so to say that people doing 10% over are knowingly speeding and should be punished doesn't really stand in all circumstances and conditions, hence the need for a margin and element of discretion.

 

Just wondering, under what grounds would you appeal?